PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN)
205.980.01 (0.00%)
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
3.16%
Revenue growth above 1.5x QCOM's 1.90%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
7.64%
Positive gross profit growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-97.12%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-97.12%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
0.75%
Positive net income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
-7.69%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
26.80%
Share reduction more than 1.5x QCOM's 63.93%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-7.31%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 63.93%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-21.13%
Dividend reduction while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
19.36%
Positive OCF growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
62.50%
Positive FCF growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
77.23%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 201.20%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
35.62%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 201.20%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
28.40%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 55.29%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
627.81%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 627.81% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
954.25%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 954.25% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
40.07%
Net income/share CAGR of 40.07% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
314.28%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 314.28% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-6.17%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.56%
Dividend/share CAGR of 3.56% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-41.28%
Negative near-term dividend growth while QCOM invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
10.84%
AR growth well above QCOM's 8.50%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
2.55%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QCOM's 26.24%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
7.36%
Asset growth above 1.5x QCOM's 1.34%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-15.41%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
1.99%
We have some new debt while QCOM reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
8.63%
SG&A growth well above QCOM's 1.68%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.